California Resources Corp

Described below are certain risks and uncertainties that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flow. These risks are not the only risks we face. Our business could also be affected materially and adversely by other risks and uncertainties that are not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be insignificant.

Summary:

Risks Related to Our Oil and Gas Business

•Prices for our products are volatile and a substantial decline in prices over an extended period could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to invest in our assets.

•Our producing properties are located exclusively in California, making us vulnerable to risks associated with having operations concentrated in this geographic area, including drought, earthquake and wildfire risks.

•Drilling for and producing oil and natural gas carries significant operational risks and uncertainty. We may not drill wells at the times we schedule, or at all. Wells we do drill may not yield production in economic quantities or generate the expected payback.

•Our business involves substantial capital investments, and we may be unable to fund these investments which could lead to a decline in our oil and natural gas reserves or production.

•We may be negatively impacted by inflation.

•We are subject to economic downturns and the effects of public health events which may materially and adversely affect the demand and the market price for our products.

•The military conflicts in Ukraine, Israel and other countries in the Middle East have caused price volatility and geopolitical instability which impact our business.

•Some of our competitors have greater resources than us and we may not be able to successfully compete in acquiring and developing new properties.

•Our hedging activities limit our ability to realize the full benefits of increases in commodity prices.

•Estimates of proved reserves and related future net cash flows are not precise. The actual quantities of our proved reserves and future net cash flows may prove to be higher or lower than estimated.

•From time to time we may engage in step-out drilling, or drilling in new or emerging plays. Our drilling results are uncertain, and the value of our undeveloped acreage may decline if drilling is unsuccessful.

Risks Related to Carbon TerraVault and Our Carbon Management Segment

•We may not be able to grow our Carbon TerraVault business and develop large scale CCS projects.

•Our ability to achieve our emissions goals and other goals related to carbon management activities is subject to risks and uncertainties.

•Our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects depend on financial and tax incentives to be economical, and these incentives may not currently be sufficient for our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects to be economical, may not be fully realized, or could be changed or terminated.

•Our Carbon TerraVault JV with Brookfield is subject to inherent uncertainties which could adversely affect our ability to implement our carbon management strategy.

Risk Factors Related to Our Business Generally

•Increasing activism against the industries in which we operate, including the oil and gas industry and our involvement in carbon capture, storage, utilization and sequestration, presents risks to our business.

•Increased attention to ESG matters may adversely impact our business.

•Acquisition and disposition activities, including continued integration of the Aera Merger, involve substantial risks.

•We may incur substantial losses and be subject to substantial liability claims as a result of pollution, environmental conditions or catastrophic events. We may not be insured for, or our insurance may be inadequate to protect us against, these risks.

•Cybersecurity attacks, systems failures and other disruptions could adversely affect us.

Risks Related to Regulation and Government Action

•We may face material delays related to our ability to timely obtain permits necessary for our operations, or be unable to secure such permits on favorable terms or at all as a result of numerous California political, regulatory, and legal developments.

•We may face increased local restrictions on oil and gas exploration and production operations or even be prohibited from operating in certain areas as a result of recently enacted California legislation.

•Recent and future actions by the State of California could reduce both the demand for and supply of oil and natural gas within the state and consequently have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

•Our business is highly regulated and government authorities can delay or deny permits and approvals or change requirements governing our operations, including hydraulic fracturing and other well stimulation methods, enhanced production techniques and fluid injection or disposal, that could increase costs, restrict operations and change or delay the implementation of our business plans.

•Our Carbon TerraVault business and our CCS projects are subject to extensive government regulation much of which is still being developed. Failure to comply with these regulations and obtain the necessary permits, or the development of government regulations that are unfavorable to our CCS projects, could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

•New and developing regulations related to CO 2 unitization, permitting and pipeline safety could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

•Our operations and financial performance may be negatively affected directly or indirectly by changes in trade policies and tariffs.

•Concerns about climate change and other environmental issues may prompt governmental action that could have a material adverse effect on our operations or results.

•The Inflation Reduction Act could accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy and could impose new costs on our operations.

•Tax law changes could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

•Financial assurance requirements related to plugging and abandonment costs, decommissioning, and site restoration on those who acquire the right to operate wells and production facilities could impact our ability to sell or acquire assets in California or increase our costs in connection with the same.

Risks Related to our Indebtedness

•We may not be able to amend or refinance our existing debt to create more operating and financial flexibility and to enhance shareholder returns.

•Our existing and future indebtedness may adversely affect our business and limit our financial flexibility.

•We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our indebtedness and may be forced to take other actions to satisfy the obligations under our indebtedness, which may not be successful.

•The lenders under our Revolving Credit Facility could limit our ability to borrow and restrict our ability to use or access capital.

•Restrictive covenants in our Revolving Credit Facility and the indentures governing our Senior Notes may limit our financial and operating flexibility.

•Variable rate indebtedness under our Revolving Credit Facility subjects us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

•Our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares of our common stock is subject to certain risks.

•The trading price of our common stock may decline, and you may not be able to resell shares of our common stock at prices equal to or greater than the price you paid or at all.

•Future issuances of our common stock could reduce our stock price, and any additional capital raised by us through the sale of equity or convertible securities may dilute your ownership in us.

•The ownership position of certain of our stockholders limits other stockholders’ ability to influence corporate matters and could affect the price of our common stock.

•Sales of shares of our common stock by our executive officers could negatively impact the market price for our common stock.

Risks Related to Our Oil and Gas Business

Prices for our products are volatile and a substantial decline in prices over an extended period could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to invest in our assets.

Our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and ability to invest in our assets are highly dependent on oil, natural gas and NGL prices. A substantial decline in prices for these products would reduce our cash flows from operations and could reduce our borrowing capacity or cause a default under our financing agreements.

Prices for oil, natural gas and NGL may fluctuate widely in response to relatively minor changes in domestic and global supply and demand, market uncertainty and a variety of additional factors that are beyond our control, such as:

•domestic and global inventory levels;

•political and economic conditions, including international disputes such as the conflicts in Ukraine, Israel and other countries in the Middle East;

•pandemics, epidemics, outbreaks or other public health events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic;

•the actions of OPEC and other significant producers and governments;

•changes or disruptions in actual or anticipated production, refining and processing;

•worldwide drilling and exploration activities;

•government energy policies and regulation, including with respect to climate change;

•the effects of conservation;

•natural disasters, weather conditions and other seasonal impacts;

•speculative trading in derivative contracts;

•currency exchange rates;

•technological advances;

•transportation and storage capacity, bottlenecks and costs in producing areas;

•the price, availability and acceptance of alternative energy sources;

•regional market conditions; and

•other matters affecting the supply and demand dynamics for these products.

Lower prices could have adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including:

•reducing our proved oil and natural gas reserves over time;

•limiting our capital expenditures and our ability to grow or maintain future production;

•causing a reduction in our borrowing base under our Revolving Credit Facility, which could affect our liquidity;

•reducing our cash flow and ability to make interest payments or maintain compliance with financial covenants in the agreements governing our indebtedness, which could trigger mandatory loan repayments and default and foreclosure by our lenders and bondholders against our assets; and

•limiting our access to funds through the capital markets and the price we could obtain for asset sales or other monetization transactions.

Our hedging program does not provide downside protection for all of our production. As a result, our hedges do not fully protect us from commodity price declines, and we may be unable to enter into acceptable additional hedges in the future.

Our producing properties are located exclusively in California, making us vulnerable to risks associated with having operations concentrated in this geographic area, including drought, earthquake and wildfire risks.

Our operations are concentrated in California. Because of this geographic concentration, the success and profitability of our operations may be disproportionately exposed to the effect of regional conditions. Changes in state or regional laws and regulations affecting our operations, local price fluctuations and other regional supply and demand factors, including gathering, pipeline, transportation and storage capacity constraints, limited potential customers, infrastructure capacity and availability of rigs, equipment, oil field services, supplies and labor. Our operations are also exposed to natural disasters and related events common to California, such as wildfires, mudslides, high winds, earthquakes and extreme weather events, and the potential increase to the frequency of drought and flooding. Further, our operations may be exposed to power outages, mechanical failures, industrial accidents or labor difficulties. Any one of these events has the potential to cause producing wells to be shut in, delay operations and growth plans, decrease cash flows, increase operating and capital costs, prevent development of lease inventory before expiration and limit access to markets for our products.

Drilling for and producing oil and natural gas carries significant operational risks and uncertainty. We may not drill wells at the times we schedule, or at all. Wells we do drill may not yield production in economic quantities or generate the expected payback.

The development of oil and natural gas properties are subject to numerous operational risks, including the risks of permitting or construction delays, equipment failures, accidents, environmental hazards, unusual geological formations or unexpected pressure or irregularities within formations, adverse weather conditions, title disputes, surface access disputes, disappointing drilling results or reservoir performance (including lack of production response to workovers or improved and enhanced recovery efforts), cost over-runs and other associated risks.

Development activities also depend in part on our analysis of geophysical, geologic, engineering, production and other technical data and processes, including the interpretation of 3D seismic data. This analysis is often inconclusive or subject to varying interpretations.

Any of the forgoing operational risks could cause actual results to differ materially from the expected payback or cause a well or project to become uneconomic or less profitable than forecast.

We have specifically identified drilling activities for the next several years, which are an integral part of our production strategy. Our actual drilling activities may materially differ from those presently identified. If future drilling activities do not generate sufficient production and reserves, we may be forced to curtail drilling or development of these and other projects. We make assumptions about the consistency and accuracy of data when we identify locations for new wells or opportunities for workovers, sidetracks and deepenings, and these assumptions may prove inaccurate. We cannot guarantee that our identified new well drilling locations will ever be drilled or if we will be able to produce crude oil or natural gas from these drilling locations or from our other drilling activities. In addition, some of our leases could expire if we do not establish production in the leased acreage. The combined net acreage covered by leases expiring in the next three years represented 2% of our total net undeveloped acreage at December 31, 2024.

Our business involves substantial capital investments and we may be unable to fund these investments which could lead to a decline in our oil and natural gas reserves or production.

Our development activities involve substantial capital investments. We intend to fund our 2025 capital program using cash flow from operations. Accordingly, a reduction in projected operating cash flow could cause us to reduce our future capital investments. In general, the ability to execute our capital plan depends on a number of factors, including:

•the amount of oil, natural gas and NGLs we are able to produce;

•commodity prices;

•regulatory and third-party approvals;

•our ability to timely drill, complete and stimulate wells;

•our ability to secure equipment, services and personnel; and

•our liquidity and ability fund capital expenditures.

Access to future capital may be limited by our lenders, capital markets constraints, activist funds or investors, or poor stock price performance. Because of these and other potential variables, we may be unable to deploy capital in the manner planned, which may negatively impact our production levels and development activities and limit our ability to make acquisitions or enter into partnerships and farmout arrangements.

Unless we make sufficient capital investments and conduct successful development and exploration activities or acquire properties containing proved reserves, our proved reserves will decline as those reserves are produced. Our ability to make the necessary long-term capital investments or acquisitions needed to maintain or expand our reserves may be impaired to the extent we have insufficient cash flow from operations or liquidity to fund those activities. Over the long term, a continuing decline in our production and reserves would reduce our liquidity and ability to satisfy our debt obligations by reducing our cash flow from operations and the value of our assets.

We may be negatively impacted by inflation.

Increases in inflation may have an adverse effect on us. Operating and capital costs in the oil and natural gas industry are heavily influenced by commodity prices, including the prices we pay for electricity, natural gas and steel-based materials. For example, we use natural gas in our operations to generate steam for use in steamfloods and we purchase additional volumes of natural gas to support our operations. We also use electricity generated by our Elk Hills power plant to power our oil and gas operations in the Elk Hills field. If we are unable to generate sufficient electricity for use in our operations, we may need to purchase electricity from third parties. Increases in the volumes or prices of commodities used in our operations could cause increases in our operating expenses. We attempt to manage our exposure to price increases of certain commodities used in our operations, including natural gas, by entering into hedges or longer-term contracts with fixed price arrangements. However, these measures do not fully protect us from the effects of commodity price increases and we may not be able to enter into similar arrangements in the future on acceptable terms or at all. Inflation could also result in higher interest rates in the United States, which could increase the cost of future financing efforts.

We are subject to economic downturns and the effects of public health events which may materially and adversely affect the demand and the market price for our products.

The marketing of our oil, natural gas and NGLs is dependent upon the existence of adequate markets for our products. Imbalances between the supply of and demand for these products, including as a result of economic downturns or the effects of public health events, could cause extreme market volatility and a substantial adverse effect on commodity prices. A world health event, the extent of actions that may be taken to contain or treat its impact, and the impacts on the economy generally and oil prices in particular, are uncertain, rapidly changing and hard to predict. This uncertainty could force us to reduce costs, including by decreasing operating expenses and lowering capital expenditures, and such actions could negatively affect future production and our reserves. We may experience labor shortages if our employees are unwilling or unable to come to work because of illness, quarantines, government actions or other restrictions in connection with a pandemic. If our suppliers cannot deliver the materials, supplies and services we need, we may need to suspend operations. In addition, we are exposed to changes in commodity prices which have been and will likely remain volatile. We cannot predict the duration and extent of a pandemic's adverse impact on our operating results.

Additionally, to the extent a world health event adversely impacts the global business and economic environment, which adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening or exacerbating many of the other risks described in the Risk Factors herein.

The military conflicts in Ukraine, Israel and other countries in the Middle East have caused price volatility and geopolitical instability which impact our business.

The military conflicts in Ukraine, Israel and other countries in the Middle East have caused volatility in the prices of natural gas, oil and NGLs, and the extent and duration of the military action, sanctions and resulting market disruptions have been significant and could continue to have a substantial impact on the global economy and our business for an unknown period of time.

In the fourth quarter of 2024, OPEC+ extended its nearly 4 million barrels per day voluntary reduction in production quotas as well as 2.2 million barrels per day in voluntary production curtailments. While actual OPEC+ production capabilities are difficult to discern, any return to previous targeted production levels—coupled with expanding Iranian, Venezuelan, Brazilian and U.S. production—could cause commodity prices to decline which would reduce the revenues we receive for our oil production.

Materialization of either of the events described above may also magnify the impact of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section.

Some of our competitors have greater resources than us and we may not be able to successfully compete in acquiring and developing new properties.

We face competition in every aspect of our business, including, but not limited to, acquiring reserves and leases, obtaining goods and services and hiring and retaining employees needed to operate and manage our business and marketing natural gas, NGLs or oil. Competitors include a multinational oil company, independent production companies and individual producers and operators. In California, our competitors are few, which may limit available acquisition opportunities. Some of our competitors have greater financial and other resources than we do. As a result, these competitors may be able to address such competitive factors more effectively than we can or withstand industry downturns more easily than we can.

Our hedging activities limit our ability to realize the full benefits of increases in commodity prices.

We enter into hedges to mitigate our economic exposure to commodity price volatility and ensure our financial strength and liquidity by protecting our cash flows. Our Revolving Credit Facility also includes a covenant that would require us to enter into hedges if the ratio of our indebtedness to Consolidated EBITDAX (as defined in the Revolving Credit Facility) exceeds certain levels. These hedges expose us to the risk of financial losses depending on commodity price movements and may prevent us from realizing the full benefits of price increases. Our ability to realize the benefits of our hedges also depends in part upon the counterparties to these contracts honoring their financial obligations. If any of our counterparties are unable to perform their obligations in the future, we could be exposed to increased cash flow volatility that could affect our liquidity. In addition, our level of hedging activity may be impacted by financial regulations that could increase our costs of hedging and/or limit the number of hedging counterparties available to us.

Estimates of proved reserves and related future net cash flows are not precise. The actual quantities of our proved reserves and future net cash flows may prove to be higher or lower than estimated.

Many uncertainties exist in estimating quantities of proved reserves and related future net cash flows. Our estimates are based on various assumptions that require significant judgment in the evaluation of available information. Our assumptions may ultimately prove to be inaccurate. Additionally, reservoir data may change over time as more information becomes available from development and appraisal activities.

Our ability to maintain or increase our reserves, other than through acquisitions, depends on our ability to drill new wells, which is currently limited due to the lack of availability of new well permits as described below. See Risks Related to Regulation and Government Action – We may face material delays related to our ability to timely obtain permits necessary for our operations or be unable to secure such permits on favorable terms or at all as a result of numerous California political, regulatory, and legal developments.

To the extent we are able to drill new wells, our ability to maintain or increase reserves (other than through acquisitions) is contingent on the success of improved recovery, extension and discovery projects, each of which hinges on reservoir characteristics, technology improvements and oil and natural gas prices, as well as capital and operating costs. Many of these factors are outside management’s control and will affect whether the historical sources of proved reserves additions continue to provide reserves at similar levels.

Generally, lower prices adversely affect the quantity of our reserves as those reserves expected to be produced in later years, which tend to be costlier on a per unit basis, become uneconomic. In addition, a portion of our proved undeveloped reserves may no longer meet the economic producibility criteria under the applicable rules or may be removed due to the lack of drilling permits or insufficient capital to develop these projects within the SEC-mandated five-year limit.

In addition, our reserves information represents estimates prepared by internal engineers. Although 85% of our estimated proved reserve volumes as of December 31, 2024, were audited by our independent petroleum engineer, NSAI, we cannot guarantee that the estimates are accurate.

Reserves estimation is a partially subjective process of estimating accumulations of oil and natural gas. Estimates of economically recoverable oil and natural gas reserves and of future net cash flows from those reserves depend upon a number of variables and assumptions. Changes in these variables and assumptions could require us to make significant negative reserves revisions, which could affect our liquidity by reducing the borrowing base under our Revolving Credit Facility. In addition, factors such as the availability of capital, geology, government regulations and permits, the effectiveness of development plans and other factors could affect the source or quantity of future reserves additions.

From time to time we may engage in step-out drilling or drilling in new or emerging plays. Our drilling results are uncertain, and the value of our undeveloped acreage may decline if drilling is unsuccessful.

The risk profile for step-out drilling or drilling in new or emerging plays is higher than for other locations because we have less geologic and production data and drilling history, in particular for drilling in unconventional reservoirs, which are in unproven geologic plays. Our ability to profitably drill and develop our identified drilling locations depends on a number of variables, including crude oil and natural gas prices, capital availability, costs, drilling results, regulatory approvals, available transportation capacity and other factors. We may not find commercial amounts of oil or natural gas or the costs of drilling, completing, stimulating and operating wells in these locations may be higher than initially expected. If future drilling results in these projects do not establish sufficient reserves to achieve an economic return, we may curtail drilling or development of these projects. In either case, the value of our undeveloped acreage may decline and could be impaired.

Risks Related to Carbon TerraVault and Our Carbon Management Segment

We may not be able to grow our Carbon TerraVault business and develop large scale CCS projects.

We are developing a carbon management business in California that relies on CCS projects. To our knowledge, there are no existing large-scale CCS projects in California similar to those that we are seeking to develop. These projects face operational, technological and regulatory risks that could be considerable due to the early-stage nature of these projects and the sector generally. Our ability to successfully develop these projects depends on a number of factors that we are not able to fully control, including the following:

•Obtaining Class VI permits for carbon dioxide injection and storage from the EPA may take years, and the time to obtain permits may vary with the complexity and type of storage reservoir. The analysis of the suitability of a reservoir for carbon sequestration is complex and our permit applications are subject to extensive review by the EPA. There can be no assurances that the EPA will release Class VI permits to us when we expect, if at all. Even if we are successful in our efforts to obtain Class VI permits, the permits could be subject to legal challenges.

•The development of large-scale CCS projects is an emerging sector and there are no meaningful precedents to gauge the likely range of economic terms upon which these projects may be feasibly developed. In addition, any of the operational, regulatory or financial risks described herein could cause actual results to differ materially from expected payback or cause a project to become uneconomic or less profitable than forecast.

•The development of CCS and related projects will likely require us, our joint venture partner, and third-party emitters to make significant capital investments in the relevant technology and infrastructure and we may not have sufficient capital resources to fund such investments. Such projects may also depend on third party financing and such financing may not be available on reasonable terms or at all. In some cases, these projects will involve the production and sale of hydrogen, ammonia or other products and markets for some of these products are still emerging.

•The development of a CCS project will likely require us to enter into long term binding agreements with large carbon emitters and other third parties and we may not be able to do so on agreeable terms or at all. Such agreements are complex and may involve allocation of not only fees but also various credits, incentives and environmental attributes associated with the storage of CO 2. Not all emission sources produce sufficiently large quantities of pure or relatively pure streams of CO 2, or have installed equipment to capture such CO 2, so as to be useable in one or more of our CCS projects. As a result, we cannot assure whether we will be able to access CO 2 emissions in sufficient quantities or on terms that are acceptable to us.

•The development and operation of cost-effective, commercial-scale hydrogen and ammonia production facilities and associated sequestration facilities are highly complex. We may participate in the development of production facilities that provide the emissions for our CCS business. There can be no assurances that we or our partners will be able to successfully develop these production facilities, or that we will be able to develop the related sequestration facilities, in a timely manner or at all. In addition, there can be no assurances that these facilities can be maintained and operated over the longer term. The financing and development of these projects may depend on the availability of long term off-take agreements for these products and the market for hydrogen is still developing. It may not be possible for us or our partners to enter into these types of agreements on acceptable terms or at all.

•Certain of our anticipated CCS project sites rely on pore space that we do not own and we may need to enter into agreements with landowners to allow us to inject CO 2. The market for such landowner agreements is evolving with the evolution of the CCS industry and it may not be possible for us to enter into these types of agreements on acceptable terms or at all.

•Complex recordkeeping and GHG emissions/sequestration accounting may be required in connection with one or more of our projects, which may increase the costs of such operations. Different methodologies may be required for various regulatory and non-regulatory accounts regarding GHG emissions/sequestration at one or more of our projects, including but not limited to compliance with the EPA’s Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.

•Carbon capture may be viewed as a pathway to the continued use of fossil fuels and there may be organized opposition (including lawsuits) to CCS projects from environmental groups, local residents and legislators.

•Other regulatory uncertainties described below.

There can be no assurances that we will successfully develop our CCS projects, including our cryogenic gas plant CCS project or CalCapture, and a failure to do so would have an adverse effect on our carbon management business and its prospects. Our carbon management segment is currently in an early stage of development, and we do not expect the failure of a single CCS project to create an impact on our overall financial condition or operations. However, as the scale of our CCS projects grows, so will its impact on our overall financial condition and operations. Moreover, our failure to successfully develop our CCS projects would adversely affect our ability to claim emissions reductions related to our sequestration activities and our ability to meet our carbon management goals, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our business and reputation.

Our ability to achieve our emissions and other goals related to our carbon management activities is subject to risks and uncertainties.

We have adopted a number of targets and objectives related to sustainability matters. Our efforts to research, establish, accomplish, and accurately report on these targets and objectives expose us to numerous operational, reputational, financial, legal, and other risks. Our ability to achieve any stated target or objective is not guaranteed and is subject to numerous factors and conditions, some of which are outside of our control. We are reviewing the impact of the Aera Merger and its assets on our ability to meet our previously announced 2045 Full-Scope Net Zero goal and may revise our goal to reflect our current business and other considerations. In any event, this goal includes Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and estimation and management of Scope 3 emissions are subject to some degree of uncertainty. We cannot guarantee that we have been able to completely quantify the full scope of our emissions and account for mitigating all such emissions in our Full-Scope Net Zero goal.

Our ability to achieve our emissions goal relies heavily on our ability to develop our Carbon TerraVault business and related CCS projects, which is subject to uncertainties and risks (including those risks described herein), such as the timely receipt of permits and third party challenges relating to the same. In addition, the commercial and regulatory environment related to emissions reductions and reporting is evolving and uncertain, and changes in GHG emission accounting methodologies or new developments related to climate science could impact our ability to claim emissions reductions related to our sequestration activities and timely achieve our emissions goal or at all. If we are not able to successfully develop Carbon TerraVault and its CCS projects and claim related emissions reductions, our ability to achieve our emissions goal would be materially and adversely affected.

Our business may face increased scrutiny from investors and other stakeholders related to our sustainability activities, including the goals, targets, and objectives that we announce, and our methodologies and timelines for pursuing them. If our sustainability practices do not meet investor or other stakeholder expectations and standards, which continue to evolve, our reputation, our ability to attract or retain employees, and our attractiveness as an investment or business partner could be negatively affected. Similarly, our failure or perceived failure to pursue or fulfill our sustainability-focused goals, targets, and objectives, to comply with ethical, environmental, or other standards, regulations, or expectations, or to satisfy various reporting standards with respect to these matters, within the timelines we announce, or at all, could adversely affect our business or reputation, as well as expose us to government enforcement actions and private litigation.

Our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects depend on financial and tax incentives to be economical, and these incentives may not currently be sufficient for our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects to be economical, may not be fully realized, or could be changed or terminated.

Congress has incentivized the development of carbon capture projects, clean hydrogen production projects and other projects relating to the production of certain clean fuels through the establishment of various tax credits, including the 45Q credit (credit for carbon oxide sequestration) and the 45V credit (credit for production of clean hydrogen). The successful development of our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects is dependent upon our ability to directly or indirectly benefit from these tax credits. The amount of tax credits from which we may directly or indirectly benefit in connection with our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects is dependent upon satisfaction of certain requirements, some of which have not been fully developed and issued by the Treasury Department and IRS, and we cannot assure you that we (or our partners) will be able to satisfy those requirements. For example, the Treasury Department and IRS recently issued final regulations pertaining to the 45V credit which, among other things, imposed certain requirements, restrictions and limitations on the use of renewable natural gas in connection with the production of clean hydrogen that qualifies for the 45V credit, which could have a negative impact on the development of future hydrogen projects in connection with our Carbon TerraVault business. Additional financial incentives may also be required for our Carbon TerraVault business and other CCS projects to be economical. In particular, we anticipate that CCS projects associated with carbon emission reductions for transportation fuels will generate LCFS credits and that these additional credits will improve the economics of CCS projects. If the existing legal requirements for incentives such as the 45Q credit, the 45V credit or LCFS credits are subsequently amended in a manner that such incentives no longer apply or are restricted in application, directly or indirectly, to our projects, we may not be able to successfully achieve an economic return from our Carbon TerraVault business and our other CCS projects or, alternatively, the construction or operation of applicable projects may be substantially delayed such that one or more projects is unprofitable or otherwise infeasible.

The current administration signed several Executive Orders reversing, revoking or rescinding many climate-related actions and has expressed a desire to make modifications to the Inflation Reduction Act. On January 20, 2025, the current administration issued an Executive Order which paused distribution of federal funds appropriated through the IRA or the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The pause was aimed at providing time to review the processes, policies and issuance of various grants, loans, contracts or financial disbursements of appropriated funds but did not modify the IRA statutory language with respect to federal income tax credits, such as 45Q or 45V credits (for more information, see Tax law changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations). However, on January 29, 2025, the White House Office of Management and Budget rescinded the freezing of federal grants and loans, although not its efforts to review the processes with respect to federal spending. At this time, the potential impact of these various actions remains uncertain. If the current administration or Congress repeals, modifies, or otherwise limits the grants, funding and tax incentives made available under the IRA, such actions could particularly harm our carbon management business and its prospects.

If the existing legal requirements for incentives such as the 45Q credit, the 45V credit or LCFS credits are eliminated or subsequently amended in a manner that such incentives no longer apply or are restricted in application, directly or indirectly, to our projects, we may not be able to successfully achieve an economic return from our Carbon TerraVault business and our other CCS projects or, alternatively, the construction or operation of applicable projects may be substantially delayed such that one or more projects is unprofitable or otherwise infeasible.

The ability to monetize the 45Q credit is not certain. Either the owner of the carbon capture equipment or the sequester must have the ability to use the 45Q credit itself, or the owner of the carbon capture equipment must utilize direct pay (which is generally limited to the first five years of the twelve-year credit period), procure tax equity financing, or transfer the credits to another taxpayer. Similar issues exist with respect to the monetization of the 45V credit. The accessibility of direct pay, tax equity financing, and the credit transfers market for tax credits provided under the Inflation Reduction Act is still developing for the 45Q and 45V credits, and therefore uncertainties and complexities with respect to our (or our partners) ability to efficiently monetize the 45Q credit and the 45V credit exist.

The 45Q credit and the LCFS credits require that the captured CO 2 be stored in secure geological storage for long periods of time. If we are not able to satisfy this requirement for the duration of time required, there is the risk of recapture of 45Q credits or LCFS credits from us (or our partners) by the government, as well as a risk of indemnification obligations to our partners, claims from landowners and potential for fines and penalties for violations of environmental requirements. Accidental releases of CO 2 could also adversely impact our ability to meet our emissions goals.

There can be no assurances that we (or our partners) will successfully comply with the requirements for the available tax credits or LCFS, and such failure could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our Carbon TerraVault JV with Brookfield is subject to inherent uncertainties which could adversely affect our ability to implement our carbon management strategy.

In August 2022, we entered into the Carbon TerraVault JV with Brookfield to pursue the development of a carbon management segment in California. The management and financing of the joint venture are subject to inherent uncertainties. These uncertainties could potentially force us to delay or cancel CCS projects or to seek alternative sources of capital to fund our CCS projects, any of which could adversely affect our ability to achieve our emissions and other goals related to our carbon management activities.

Brookfield has committed an initial $500 million to invest in CCS projects that are jointly approved through Carbon TerraVault JV. Brookfield has contributed $92 million to date. The remaining amount of Brookfield's initial investment will depend on the amount of storage capacity that is permitted subject to certain contractual adjustments. The parties have certain put and call rights with respect to the 26R reservoir if certain milestones are not met. Future storage projects for Brookfield’s initial commitment are subject to approval of the joint venture, including Brookfield. There can be no assurances that any of these funding milestones will be achieved so that Brookfield will fund the rest of its commitment.

Furthermore, even though we own a 51% interest in the Carbon TerraVault JV, we share decision making power with Brookfield on matters that most significantly impact the economic performance of the joint venture. Any failure to reach a decision with Brookfield could potentially prevent or delay our pursuit of CCS projects or cause such projects to be cancelled. Moreover, if Brookfield does not approve a proposed CCS project that we want to pursue, we will have to seek alternative sources of capital to fund the project and there can be no assurances that such sources of capital will be available.

Risk Factors Related to Our Business Generally

Increasing activism against the industries in which we operate, including the oil and gas industry and our involvement in carbon capture, storage, utilization and sequestration, presents risks to our business.

Opposition toward oil and gas drilling and development activity has been growing over time. Companies in the oil and gas industry are often the target of efforts to delay or prevent oil and gas development by non-governmental organizations and individuals. These activists use a variety of tactics that primarily rely on allegations regarding safety, environmental compliance and business practices. At both the state and federal level, these tactics include seeking changes to laws, pressuring governmental agencies to promulgate regulations or engage in rulemaking, or pursuing litigation. For example, we were recently a named real party in interest in Center for Biological Diversity v. City of Long Beach, Long Beach City Council, California State Lands Commission, et al., a lawsuit brought by an environmental non-governmental organization that sought the shut down of the Long Beach Unit on the basis of a purported CEQA violation by certain governmental entities. While the court ruled against the claimants in this matter, we cannot provide any assurances that we will be similarly successful in any future litigation by activists.

This opposition also extends to our carbon management segment as certain activists oppose carbon capture and sequestration efforts by the oil and gas industry for various reasons. For example, on November 22, 2024, a group of non-governmental organizations filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Injunctive Relief against Kern County and its Board of Supervisors (CTV I Complaint) in Kern County for our CTV I project. See Regulation of Carbon Capture, Sequestration and Storage - CCS Project Permitting. Such lawsuits have the potential to delay timely construction of the project and commencement of operations and could otherwise have a material and adverse effect on our carbon management business and its prospects.

Due to heightened concerns around climate change and GHG emissions, there is often considerable pressure on lawmakers, regulators and others to take action with respect to these allegations regardless of their perceived merit. This pressure is particularly high in California. We may need to incur significant costs associated with responding to these initiatives and such actions may have a material adverse effect on our financial results. Complying with any resulting additional legal or regulatory requirements that are substantial or prevent our activity could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Increased attention to ESG matters may adversely impact our business.

We face increased attention and expectations from various sources related to our business. This includes increased social expectations on energy companies to address climate change and other environmental and social impacts. In addition, investors and others have evolving expectations regarding voluntary or mandatory ESG disclosures. Finally, increased consumer demand for alternative forms of energy may result in increased costs, reduced demand for our products, reduced profits, increased investigations and litigation. Any of the foregoing negative impacts on our stock price and access to capital. Increased attention to climate change and environmental conservation, for example, may result in demand shifts for oil and natural gas products and additional governmental investigations and private litigation against us. To the extent that societal pressures or political or other factors are involved, it is possible that liability could be imposed without regard to our causation of or contribution to the asserted damage, or to other mitigating factors. While we may participate in various voluntary frameworks and certification programs to improve or support the ESG profile of our operations and products, we cannot guarantee that such participation or certification will have the intended results on our or our products’ ESG profile.

Moreover, while we may create and publish voluntary disclosures regarding ESG matters from time to time, many of the statements in those voluntary disclosures will be based on expectations and assumptions or hypothetical scenarios that may or may not be representative of actual risks or events, including the costs associated therewith. Such expectations, assumptions or hypothetical scenarios are necessarily uncertain and may be prone to error or subject to misinterpretation given the long timelines involved and the lack of an established approach to identifying, measuring, and reporting on many ESG matters. Additionally, while we may also announce various voluntary ESG targets, such targets are often aspirational and may be subject to change depending on changed circumstances, methodologies, business forecasts or other factors. For example, we are reviewing the impact of the Aera Merger and its assets on our ability to meet our previously announced 2045 Full-Scope Net Zero goal and may revise our goal to reflect our current business and other considerations. We may not be able to meet such targets in the manner or on such a timeline as initially contemplated, including, but not limited to as a result of unforeseen costs or technical difficulties associated with achieving such results. To the extent we do meet such targets, they may ultimately be achieved through various contractual arrangements, including the purchase of various credits or offsets that may be deemed to mitigate our ESG impact instead of actual changes in our ESG performance. However, we cannot guarantee that there will be sufficient offsets available for purchase given the increased demand from numerous businesses implementing net zero goals, or that, notwithstanding our reliance on any reputable third-party registries, that the offsets we do purchase will successfully achieve the emissions reductions they represent. Some of these arrangements may receive scrutiny from certain constituencies who criticize the methodology of offsets or do not believe offsets should be utilized to neutralize GHG emissions. Also, despite these aspirational goals, we may receive pressure from investors, lenders, or other groups to adopt more aggressive climate or other ESG-related goals, but we cannot guarantee that we will be able to pursue or implement such goals because of potential costs or technical or operational obstacles.

Organizations that provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to ESG matters. Such ratings are used by some investors to evaluate their investment and voting decisions. Companies in the energy industry, and in particular those focused on oil or natural gas extraction, often do not score as well under ESG assessments compared to companies in other industries. While such ratings do not impact all investors' investment or voting decisions, unfavorable ESG ratings may lead to increased negative investor sentiment toward us and to the diversion of their investment away from the fossil fuel industry to other industries which could have a negative impact on our stock price and our access to and costs of capital. To the extent ESG matters negatively impact our reputation, we may not be able to compete as effectively or recruit or retain employees, which may adversely affect our operations.

Public statements with respect to ESG matters, such as emissions reduction goals, other environmental targets, or other commitments addressing certain employment practices or social initiatives, are becoming increasingly subject to heightened scrutiny from public and governmental authorities. For example, the SEC has recently taken enforcement action against companies for ESG-related misconduct, including alleged “greenwashing,”i.e., misleading information or false claims overstating potential ESG benefits. Certain non-governmental organizations and other private actors have filed lawsuits against entities under various securities and consumer protection laws alleging that certain ESG statements, goals, or standards were misleading, false or otherwise deceptive. Certain employment practices or social initiatives are the subject of scrutiny by both those calling for the continued advancement of such policies, as well as those who believe they should be curbed, including government actors, and the complex regulatory and legal frameworks applicable to such initiatives continue to evolve. More recent political developments could mean that the Company faces increasing criticism or litigation risks from certain “anti-ESG” parties, including various government agencies. Such sentiment may focus on the Company’s environmental commitments (such as reducing GHG emissions) or its pursuit of certain employment practices or social initiatives, which anti-ESG proponents may assert as unlawful, political or polarizing in nature or are alleged to violate laws based, in part, on changing priorities of, or interpretations by, federal agencies or state governments. Consideration of ESG-related factors in the Company’s decision-making could be subject to increasing scrutiny and objection from such anti-ESG parties. As a result, the Company may be subject to pressure from the media or through other means, such as governmental investigations, enforcement actions, or other proceedings, all of which could adversely affect our reputation and our business. Accordingly, there may be increased costs related to review, implementation, and management of such policies, as well as compliance and litigation risks based both on positions we do or do not take, or work we do or do not perform.

Such ESG-related matters may also impact our customers or suppliers, which may adversely impact our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Acquisition and disposition activities, including continued integration of the Aera Merger, involve substantial risks.

We engage in acquisition activities from time to time, including the Aera Merger which closed on July 1, 2024. The Aera Merger and other acquisition activities carry risks that we may:

•not fully realize anticipated benefits due to less-than-expected reserves or production or changed circumstances;

•bear unexpected integration costs or experience other integration difficulties;

•assume liabilities that are greater than anticipated; and

•be exposed to currency, political, marketing, labor and other risks.

In connection with our acquisitions, we are often only able to perform limited due diligence. Successful acquisitions of oil and natural gas properties require an assessment of a number of factors, including estimates of recoverable reserves, the timing for recovering the reserves, exploration potential, future commodity prices, operating costs and potential environmental, regulatory and other liabilities. Such assessments are inexact and incomplete, and we may be unable to make these assessments with a high degree of accuracy.

Our acquisition activities may require us to seek approvals from our shareholders, government agencies or other regulatory bodies, depending on the nature and extent of the businesses being acquired. There can be no assurances that we would be able to obtain such approvals. If we are not able to complete acquisitions, we may not be able to grow our reserves or develop our properties in a timely manner or at all.

We regularly review our property base for the purpose of identifying nonstrategic assets, the disposition of which would increase capital resources available for other activities and create organizational and operational efficiencies. Our disposition activities carry risks that we may:

•not be able to realize reasonable prices or rates of return for assets;

•be required to retain liabilities that are greater than desired or anticipated;

•experience increased operating costs; and

•reduce our cash flows if we cannot replace associated revenue.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to divest assets on financially attractive terms or at all. Our ability to sell assets is also limited by the agreements governing our indebtedness. If we are not able to sell assets as needed, we may not be able to generate proceeds to support our liquidity and capital investments.

In addition, we have expended and will continue to expend significant time and resources in connection with any future acquisition and disposition activities.

We may incur substantial losses and be subject to substantial liability claims as a result of pollution, environmental conditions or catastrophic events. We may not be insured for, or our insurance may be inadequate to protect us against, these risks.

We are not fully insured against all risks. Our business and assets are subject to risks from natural disasters and operating risks associated with oil and natural gas exploration and production activities. Pollution or environmental conditions with respect to our operations or on or from our properties, whether arising from our operations or those of our predecessors or third parties, could expose us to substantial costs and liabilities. Such events may cause operations to cease or be curtailed and could adversely affect our business, workforce and the communities in which we operate. The cost and availability of insurance for natural disasters has increased in recent years. We may be unable to obtain, or may elect not to obtain, insurance for certain risks if we believe that the cost of available insurance is excessive relative to the risks presented.

Cybersecurity attacks, systems failures, and other disruptions could adversely affect us.

We rely on electronic systems and networks to communicate, control and manage our exploration, development and production activities. We also use these systems and networks to prepare our financial management and reporting information, to analyze and store data and to communicate internally and with third parties, including our service providers and customers. If we record inaccurate data or experience infrastructure outages, our ability to communicate and control and manage our business could be adversely affected.

Cybersecurity attacks on businesses have escalated and become more sophisticated. If we or the third parties with whom we interact were to experience a successful attack, the potential consequences to our business, workforce and the communities in which we operate could be significant. We utilize various technologies, controls and procedures, as well as internal staff and external specialists to protect our systems and data, to identify and remediate vulnerabilities and to monitor and respond to threats. However, there can be no assurance that such measures will be sufficient to prevent security breaches from occurring. If a breach occurs, it may remain undetected for an extended period of time. If we or third parties with whom we interact were to experience a cybersecurity attack or a successful breach, the potential consequences could be significant, including loss of data, loss of business, damage to our reputation, potential financial or legal liability requiring us to incur significant costs, disruptions related to investigations and costs related to remediation.

Energy-related assets may be at a greater risk of strategic terrorist attacks or cybersecurity attacks than other targets. A cybersecurity attack on the digital technology that controls most oil and natural gas refining and distribution necessary to transport and market our products could impact critical distribution and storage assets or the environment, disrupt energy markets by delaying or preventing product delivery, or make it difficult or impossible to accurately account for production and settle transactions.

As cybersecurity threats continue to evolve in sophistication and magnitude, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Further, state and federal cybersecurity and data privacy legislation could result in complex new requirements that increase our cost of doing business.

Risks Related to Regulation and Government Action

We may face material delays related to our ability to timely obtain permits necessary for our operations or be unable to secure such permits on favorable terms or at all as a result of numerous California political, regulatory, and legal developments.

We must obtain various governmental permits to conduct exploration and production activities, as well as other aspects of our operations. Obtaining the necessary governmental permits is often a complex and time-consuming process involving numerous federal, state and local agencies. The duration and success of each permitting effort is contingent upon many variables not within our control. In the context of obtaining permits or approvals, the Company will need to comply with known standards, existing laws (such as CEQA), and regulations that may entail greater or lesser costs and delays depending on the nature of the activity to be permitted and the interpretation of the laws and regulations implemented by the permitting authority.

In recent years, we have experienced significant delays with respect to obtaining new well, sidetrack, deepening and rework permits from CalGEM for our operations. A variety of factors outside of our control can lead to such delays. Recent changes in CalGEM management have contributed to permitting delays and uncertainty with respect to our ability to timely obtain permits for our operations. Following such change in management, during the second half of 2023 CalGEM focused on the development of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for permit review, and as a practical matter ceased issuing permits pending the completion of this process. CalGEM released its SOP for the review of applications for rework permits in late Q4 2023 and recently finalized its Lead Agency Preliminary Review process for sidetrack permits. In 2024, CalGEM resumed issuing permits for reworks and sidetracks to CRC and other operators. Subject to limited exceptions, CalGEM has not issued any permits for new production wells to any operators since December 2022.

We have experienced delays obtaining permits as a result of litigation related to the Kern County EIR for the past several years. Most recently, in March 2023, Kern County was directed to prepare a revised EIR that corrects certain CEQA violations, circulate the revised EIR for public review and comment, and prepare and publish responses to any comments received before certifying the revised EIR. The suspension of the Kern County EIR remains in effect. We are in the process of pursuing alternative pathways for addressing CEQA compliance for our oil and natural gas permitting process, this would be a lengthy process and we cannot predict with complete certainty whether we would be able to timely obtain permits using this alternative.

As a result of these issues and current lack of permits with respect to our Kern County properties, we currently plan to operate one active rig within Kern County in 2025 and have the requisite number of permits in hand to keep that rig active throughout the year. We also plan to increase our active rig count in Kern County from one rig to two in the second half of 2025 based on our existing permits. However, there is no certainty that we will obtain permits on that timeline or at all, which may further adversely affect our future development plans, proved undeveloped reserves, business, operations, cash flows, financial position and results of operations. In 2025, approximately $21 million of capital to develop proved reserves relates to drilling and completing sidetracks in Kern County for which we do not presently have a permit.

We have also experienced delays obtaining drilling permits from CalGEM since the passage of Senate Bill No. 1137, which established 3,200 feet as the minimum distance between new oil and natural gas production wells and certain sensitive receptors such as homes, schools and businesses open to the public. The law became effective January 1, 2023 and CalGEM issued emergency regulations implementing the requirements of the law on January 6, 2023. However, on February 3, 2023, the Secretary of State of California certified voter signatures collected in connection with a referendum for the November 2024 ballot to repeal Senate Bill No. 1137. However, in June 2024, the ballot proposal was withdrawn with the proposal’s sponsors indicating a view to challenging Senate Bill No. 1137 in court. The provisions of Senate Bill No. 1137 became effective immediately in June 2024. Then, on September 30, 2024, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 218, which delays the deadline for some compliance with CalGEM’s regulations implementing Senate Bill No. 1137 until July 1, 2026, and further delays compliance with certain other requirements of Senate Bill No. 1137 by up to three years. There is continued uncertainty with respect to the ability to book proved undeveloped reserves and drill within the setback zone established by Senate Bill No. 1137. As a result, we do not have and proved undeveloped reserves booked within currently defined setback zones as of year-end 2024. As a result of Senate Bill No. 1137, in addition to write-downs recorded in 2023, we further reduced the net present value of our proved undeveloped reserves by 6% and our overall proved reserves by 1% in 2024. We expect any further impact from SB 1137 to proved reserves to be minimal. (See Part I, Item 1 and 2 – Business and Properties, Regulation of Exploration and Production Activitiesfor more information).

In 2025, none of our aggregate capital to develop proved reserves relates to drilling and completing wells in Wilmington for which we do not presently have a permit. We do not plan on operating an active drilling rig in Wilmington in 2025. However, there is no certainty that we will be able to obtain a permit in the future, which may further adversely affect our future development plans, proved undeveloped reserves, business, operations, cash flows, financial position and results of operations.

We cannot guarantee that these issues or new ones that may arise in the future will not continue to delay or otherwise impair our ability to obtain drilling permits. In the past we have generally been able to mitigate permitting risks by building up a reserve of drilling permits for use throughout the year, but as a result of the issues described above, we have not been able to build our reserve of approved permits to the same level as we have in the past. If we cannot obtain new drilling or sidetrack permits in a timely manner, we have limited options to meet our drilling plans, such as the use of workovers to extend the life of existing production, which may not ultimately be sufficient to achieve our business goals. Any continuing failure to obtain certain permits or the adoption of more stringent permitting requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may face increased local restrictions on oil and gas exploration and production operations or even be prohibited from operating in certain areas as a result of recently enacted California legislation.

On September 25, 2024, Assembly Bill 3233 (AB 3233) was enacted which authorizes local governments to prohibit, oil and gas operations or development, or impose regulations, limits or prohibitions that are more protective of public health, the climate or the environment than prescribed by state law, regulation or order on such oil and gas operations or development, within their jurisdiction, including with respect to existing operations. Prior to the passage of this law, certain local governments within California had previously taken steps to limit oil and gas operations that were struck down by California courts. Monterey County previously sought to ban only new production and prohibit the use of wastewater injection as a production method. The City and County of Los Angeles previously sought to both ban new wells and phaseout existing wells over a certain period of time. If these bans were enacted, for the year ended December 31, 2024, less than 1% of our net production and proved reserves were located in the City of Los Angeles; and our operations are otherwise in unincorporated areas of Los Angeles, which would not be affected by such bans. Approximately 2% of our net production and 1% of proved reserves were located in Monterey County as of and for the year ended December 31, 2024. Although both of those local measures were struck down in court, following the adoption of AB 3233, certain legal arguments used to challenge these local actions are no longer valid and it is possible that these or other local governments in places where we operate may pass similar regulations. It is difficult to predict how local governments in California may choose to exercise their new authority under AB 3233.

While there may be future legal challenges to AB 3233 and any local ordinances enacted thereunder, we cannot predict whether or not such challenges will be successful. Notwithstanding any potential claims for regulatory takings we may have in the event local jurisdictions seek to prohibit any of our existing operations, to the extent that the local governments in the areas where we operate in California enact new restrictions or prohibitions with respect to oil and gas exploration and production activities, we could face increased operating costs, loss of revenues, and other material and adverse impacts to our business and results of operations.

Recent and future actions by the State of California could reduce both the demand for and supply of oil and natural gas within the state and consequently have a material and adverse effect on our business, and financial condition and results of operations.

In recent years, the Governor of California, the Legislature and state agencies have taken a series of actions that could materially and adversely affect the state’s oil and natural gas sector. For additional information, see Part I, Item 1 and 2 – Business and Properties, Regulation of the Industries in Which We Operate, Regulation of Exploration and Production Activities, and Risk Factors, We may face material delays related to our ability to timely obtain permits necessary for our operations, or be unable to secure such permits on favorable terms or at all as a result of numerous California political, regulatory, and legal developments.

The trend in California is to impose increasingly stringent restrictions on oil and natural gas activities. We cannot predict what actions the Governor of California, the Legislature or state agencies may take in the future, but we could face increased compliance costs, delays in obtaining the approvals necessary for our operations, exposure to increased liability, or other limitations as a result of future actions by these parties. Moreover, new developments resulting from the current and future actions of these parties could also have a material and adverse effect on our ability to operate, successfully execute drilling plans, or otherwise develop our reserves. Accordingly, recent and future actions by the Governor of California, the Legislature, and state agencies could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our business is highly regulated and government authorities can delay or deny permits and approvals or change requirements governing our operations, including hydraulic fracturing and other well stimulation methods, enhanced production techniques and fluid injection or disposal, that could increase costs, restrict operations and change or delay the implementation of our business plans.

Our operations are subject to complex and stringent federal, state, local and other laws and regulations relating to the exploration and development of our properties, as well as the production, transportation, marketing and sale of our products.

To operate in compliance with these laws and regulations, we must obtain and maintain permits, approvals and certificates from federal, state and local government authorities for a variety of activities including siting, drilling, completion, stimulation, operation, inspection, maintenance, transportation, storage, marketing, site remediation, decommissioning, abandonment, protection of habitat and threatened or endangered species, air emissions, disposal of solid and hazardous waste, fluid injection and disposal and water consumption, recycling and reuse. For example, our operations in the Wilmington Oil Field utilize injection wells to reinject produced water pursuant to waterflooding plans. These operations are subject to regulation by both the City of Long Beach and CalGEM. We are currently in discussions with the City of Long Beach and CalGEM with respect to what injection well pressure gradient complies with CalGEM’s requirements for the protection of underground aquifers while at the same time mitigating subsidence risks. CalGEM’s local office has preliminarily indicated that the injection well pressure gradient should be reduced from the gradient that has been used for several decades. As part of our ongoing discussions, we and the City of Long Beach have provided CalGEM with technical information regarding how the historical injection well pressure gradient complies with CalGEM’s requirements and to inform them of the absence of risk of leakage and a plan to gradually lower the injection gradient over time in a manner that we believe would mitigate subsidence risks. If CalGEM were to ultimately disagree and determine to reduce the injection well pressure gradient other than in a gradual manner or at a gradient which we believe is unnecessary, and we were unable to reverse that decision on appeal or other legal challenge, we expect that any such reduction in injection well pressure gradient for our operations in the Wilmington Oil Field could result in a decrease in production and reserves from the field.

Failure to comply may result in the assessment of administrative, civil and/or criminal fines and penalties, liability for noncompliance, costs of corrective action, cleanup or restoration, compensation for personal injury, property damage or other losses, and the imposition of injunctive or declaratory relief restricting or prohibiting certain operations or our access to property, water, minerals or other necessary resources, and may otherwise delay or restrict our operations and cause us to incur substantial costs. Under certain environmental laws and regulations, we could be subject to strict or joint and several liability for the removal or remediation of contamination, including on properties over which we and our predecessors had no control, without regard to fault, legality of the original activities, or ownership or control by third parties.

Our Carbon TerraVault business and our CCS projects are subject to extensive government regulation much of which is still being developed. Failure to comply with these regulations and obtain the necessary permits, or the development of government regulations that are unfavorable to our CCS projects, could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Successful development of CCS projects in the United States require that we comply with what we anticipate will be a stringent regulatory scheme requiring that we obtain certain permits applicable to subsurface injection of CO 2 for geologic sequestration. Moreover, as the operator of our CCS projects, we must demonstrate and maintain levels of financial assurance sufficient to cover the cost of corrective action, injection well plugging, post injection site care and site closure, and emergency and remedial response. There are no assurances that we will be successful in obtaining or maintaining permits or adequate levels of financial assurance for one or more of our CCS projects or that permits can be obtained on a timely basis, whether due to difficulty with the technical demonstrations required to obtain such permits, public opposition, or otherwise.

Separately, permitting CCS projects requires obtaining a number of other permits and approvals unrelated to subsurface injection from various U.S. federal and state agencies, such as for air emissions or impacts to environmental, natural, historic or cultural resources resulting from the construction and operation of a CCS facility. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain all applicable permits for CCS activities on a timely basis or on favorable terms, if at all. Moreover, to the extent any of our CCS projects will require any supporting pipeline infrastructure, we could face additional costs and delays obtaining the necessary permits and rights of ways for such infrastructure, and increased risk of opposition to our projects, which may ultimately mean we are unable to successfully pursue certain CCS projects because of these risks.

As CCS and carbon management represent an emerging sector, laws and regulations may evolve rapidly, which could impact the feasibility of one or more of our anticipated projects. To the extent additional legal or regulatory requirements are imposed, are amended, or more stringently enforced, we may incur additional costs in the pursuit of one or more of our carbon capture projects, which costs may be material or may render any one or more of our projects uneconomical.

New and developing regulations related to the CO 2 unitization, permitting and pipeline safety could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Senate Bill No. 905 contemplates the development of unitization, permitting and pipeline safety regulations over a multi-year period to facilitate the development of CCS projects in California, though the legislation does not provide for compulsory unitization. Senate Bill No. 905 also provides for a unified permitting process to simplify the permitting process for CCS projects, although this will be optional for project applicants. Additionally, the law contemplates the implementation of a new regulatory program incorporating standards that are not yet defined and that could affect the timing of future CCS projects in California. The California Air Resources Board has been tasked with developing this proposed framework. We believe our Carbon TerraVault projects will continue to be developed on a timeline consistent with our initial expectations. These initial projects are not reliant on the unitization or permitting regulations being developed. In addition, our Carbon TerraVault projects are expected to either use emitters that are directly sited above these storage facilities or rely on pipelines for transporting CO 2 Senate Bill No. 905 provides that pipelines may be used to transport carbon dioxide to or from a carbon dioxide capture, removal or sequestration project only upon conclusion of PHMSA’s rulemaking strengthening safety requirements for carbon dioxide pipelines. Although PHMSA released a notice of proposed rulemaking to this effect in early January 2025, it has not yet been published in the Federal Register and its disposition is uncertain at this time. The terms of these final pipeline safety regulations may impair or prohibit projects that rely on the transportation of CO 2.

Senate Bill No. 905 also prohibits CCS projects that utilize and permanently sequester CO 2 in connection with EOR projects. Although we do not have any existing oil and natural gas production or proved reserves associated with EOR projects, this legislation required us to transition our CalCapture project to target CCS and may require us to make other adjustments to projects in the future.

Our operations and financial performance may be negatively affected directly or indirectly by changes in trade policies and tariffs.

In recent years, the United States increased tariffs for certain goods, which triggered other nations to also increase tariffs on certain of their goods. In recent weeks, the current administration has made many announcements regarding tariffs and the extent and duration of such tariffs remain uncertain. If maintained, the newly announced tariffs and the potential escalation of trade disputes could pose a risk to our business and also directly impact our operating expenses. For example, recently announced 25% tariffs on imported steel are likely to lead to increased material costs.

Concerns about climate change and other environmental issues may prompt governmental action that could have a material adverse effect on our operations or results.

Governmental, scientific and public concern over the threat of climate change arising from GHG emissions, and regulation of GHGs and other air quality issues, may have a material adverse effect on our business in many ways, including increasing the costs to provide our products and services and reducing demand for, and consumption of, our products and services, and we may be unable to recover or pass through a significant portion of our costs. In addition, legislative and regulatory responses to such issues at the federal, state and local level may increase our capital and operating costs and render certain wells or projects uneconomic, and potentially lower the value of our reserves and other assets. Both the EPA and California have implemented laws, regulations and policies that seek to reduce GHG emissions. California’s cap-and-trade program operates under a market system and the costs of such allowances per metric ton of GHG emissions are expected to increase in the future as the CARB tightens program requirements and annually increases the minimum state auction price of allowances and reduces the state’s GHG emissions cap. As the foregoing requirements become more stringent, we may be unable to implement them in a cost-effective manner, or at all.

In August 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law. The Inflation Reduction Act includes a charge on methane emissions that exceed certain thresholds from sources required to report their GHG emissions to the EPA, including certain oil and natural gas operations. The methane emissions charge began in 2024 at $900 per ton of methane, increased to $1,200 in 2025, and will be set at $1,500 for 2026 and subsequent years. We cannot predict if Congress may take actions to repeal or revise the Inflation Reduction Act, including with respect to the methane emissions charge. In fact, the full impact of future climate regulations is uncertain at this time and it is unclear what additional actions may be taken that may have an adverse effect upon our carbon management business and its prospects.

To the extent financial markets view climate change and GHG or other emissions as an increasing financial risk, this could adversely impact our cost of, and access to, capital and the value of our stock and our assets. Current investors in oil and natural gas companies may elect in the future to shift some or all of their investments into other sectors, and institutional lenders may elect not to provide funding for oil and natural gas companies. There is also a risk that financial institutions will be required to adopt policies that have the effect of reducing the funding provided to the fossil fuel sector, although this trend has waned recently and several high-profile banks and institutional investors have withdrawn from various associations that aim to limit financing of industries that emit significant GHG emissions. Additionally, in March 2024, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a final rule that establishes a framework for the reporting of climate risks, targets and metrics. However, the future of the rule is uncertain at this time given that its implementation has been stayed pending the outcome of legal challenges. Moreover, the Commission may, under the current Administration seek to change or revoke the rule, though we cannot predict whether such action will occur or its timing. Relatedly, California has enacted new laws requiring additional disclosure with respect to certain climate-related risks and GHG emissions reduction claims. (See Part I, Item 1 and 2 – Business and Properties, Regulation of the Industries in Which We Operate, Regulation of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions for more information). Non-compliance with these new laws may result in the imposition of substantial fines or penalties. Other states are considering similar laws. Any new laws or regulations imposing more stringent requirements on our business related to the disclosure of climate-related risks may result in reputation harms among certain stakeholders if they disagree with our approach to mitigating climate-related risks, additional costs to comply with any such disclosure requirements and increased costs of and restrictions on access to capital.

We believe, but cannot guarantee, that our local production of oil, NGLs and natural gas will remain essential to meeting California’s energy and feedstock needs for the foreseeable future. We have also established 2030 Sustainability Goals for water recycling, renewables integration, methane emission reduction and carbon capture and sequestration in our life-of-field planning in an attempt to align with the state’s long-term goals and support our ability to continue to efficiently implement federal, state and local laws, regulations and policies, including those relating to air quality and climate, in the future. However, there can be no assurances that we will be able to design, permit, fund and implement such projects in a timely and cost-effective manner or at all, or that we, our customers or end users of our products will be able to satisfy long-term environmental, air quality or climate goals if those are applied as enforceable mandates.

The adoption and implementation of new or more stringent international, federal, state or local legislation, regulations or policies that impose more stringent standards for GHG or other emissions from our operations or otherwise restrict the areas in which we may produce oil, natural gas, NGLs or electricity or generate GHG or other emissions could result in increased costs of compliance or costs of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for or the value of our products and services. Additionally, political, litigation and financial risks may result in restricting or canceling oil and natural gas production activities, incurring liability for infrastructure damages or other losses as a result of climate change, or impairing our ability to continue to operate in an economic manner. Moreover, climate change may pose increasing risks of physical impacts to our operations and those of our suppliers, transporters and customers through damage to infrastructure and resources resulting from drought, wildfires, sea level changes, flooding and other natural disasters and other physical disruptions. One or more of these developments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Inflation Reduction Act could accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy and could impose new costs on our operations.

In August 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law. The Inflation Reduction Act contains hundreds of billions of dollars in incentives for the development of renewable energy, clean hydrogen, clean fuels, electric vehicles and supporting infrastructure and CCS, amongst other provisions. In addition, the Inflation Reduction Act imposes the first ever federal fee on the emission of GHGs through a methane emissions charge. The Inflation Reduction Act amends the Clean Air Act to impose a fee on the emission of methane from sources required to report their GHG emissions to the EPA, including those sources in the onshore petroleum and natural gas production categories. The methane emissions charge began in calendar year 2024 at $900 per ton of methane, increased to $1,200 in 2025, and will be set at $1,500 for 2026 and each year thereafter. Calculation of the fee is based on certain thresholds established in the Inflation Reduction Act. However, compliance with the EPA’s new methane rules (see Part I, Item 1 and 2 – Business and Properties, Regulation of the Industries in Which We Operate, Regulation of Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions) would exempt an otherwise covered facility from the requirement to pay the fee. In addition, the multiple incentives offered for various clean energy industries referenced above could further accelerate the transition of the economy away from fossil fuels towards lower- or zero-carbon emission alternatives. The methane charges and various incentives for clean energy industries could decrease demand for crude oil and natural gas and increase our compliance and operating costs, which consequently could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. However, at this time, we cannot predict if Congress may take actions to repeal or revise the Inflation Reduction Act, including with respect to the methane emissions charge.

Tax law changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to taxation by various tax authorities at the federal, state and local levels where we do business. New legislation could be enacted by any of these government authorities that could adversely affect our business.

In addition, from time to time, legislation has been proposed that would, if enacted into law, make significant changes to U.S. federal income tax laws, including the elimination of certain U.S. federal income tax benefits currently available to oil and natural gas exploration and production companies. Such changes have included, but have not been limited to: (i) the repeal of percentage depletion allowance for oil and natural gas properties; (ii) the elimination of current deductions for intangible drilling and development costs; (iii) an extension of the amortization period for certain geological and geophysical expenditures; (iv) the elimination of certain other tax deductions and relief previously available to oil and natural gas companies; and (v) an increase in the U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to corporations such as us. However, it is unclear whether any such changes will be enacted and, if enacted, how soon any such changes would be effective. Additionally, legislation could be enacted that imposes new fees or increases the taxes on oil and natural gas extraction, which could result in increased operating costs and/or reduced demand for our products. The passage of any such legislation or any other similar change in U.S. federal income tax law could eliminate or postpone certain tax deductions that are currently available with respect to natural gas and oil exploration and development or could increase costs and any such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Similarly, legislation could be enacted that changes or terminates the current tax incentives that our CCS projects depend on to be economical. The enactment of any legislation that reduces or eliminates 45Q credits or tax credits for the production of clean hydrogen could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In California, there have been numerous state and local proposals for additional income, sales, excise and property taxes, including additional taxes on oil and natural gas production and a windfall profits tax on refineries. Although such proposals targeting the oil and natural gas industry have not become law, campaigns by various interest groups could lead to additional future taxes.

Financial assurance requirements related to plugging and abandonment costs, decommissioning, and site restoration on those who acquire the right to operate wells and production facilities could impact our ability to sell or acquire assets in California or increase our costs in connection with the same.

California law imposes stringent financial assurance requirements on persons who acquire the right to operate a well or production facility in California, requiring them to file either an individual indemnity bond for single-well or production facility acquisitions, or a blanket indemnity bond for multiple wells or production facilities. The bond imposed on the acquirer is an amount determined by the state to sufficiently cover plugging and abandonment costs, decommissioning, and site restoration, and California law prohibits the closing of any acquisition of the right to operate a well or production facility until a determination on the appropriate bond amount has been completed by the state and the bond has been filed. This bonding requirement significantly impacts the economic feasibility of transferring the right to operate wells and production facilities, including transfers from smaller, less-capitalized operators to more financially stable operators such as ourselves. As of the year ended December 31, 2024, our asset retirement obligations were $1,129 million, including the obligations assumed as part of the Aera Merger. This law will continue to impact our ability to grow or divest our assets within California.

Risks Related to our Indebtedness

We may not be able to amend or refinance our existing debt to create more operating and financial flexibility and to enhance shareholder returns.

Our ability to refinance our debt depends on a variety of factors, including our ability to access the commercial banking and debt capital markets. Changes in interest rates could also impact our ability to refinance our debt. If interest rates increase, the interest expense burden of any refinanced debt or other variable rate debt would increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same. There can be no assurances that we will be successful in amending, replacing or refinancing our existing debt on acceptable terms or at all.

Our existing and future indebtedness may adversely affect our business and limit our financial flexibility.

As of December 31, 2024, we had $1,132 million of total long-term debt, net and additional borrowing capacity of $983 million under the Revolving Credit Facility (after taking into account $167 million of outstanding letters of credit). The terms of our Revolving Credit Facility and Senior Notes permit us to incur significant additional debt, some of which may be secured. Our level of future indebtedness could affect our business in several ways, including the following:

•limit management’s discretion in operating our business and our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate;

•require us to dedicate a portion of our cash flow from operations to service our existing debt, thereby reducing the cash available to finance our operations and other business activities due to restrictions on our ability to obtain additional financing, make investments, lease equipment, sell assets and engage in business combinations;

•limit our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares;

•increase our vulnerability to downturns and adverse developments in our business and the economy generally;

•limit our ability to access the capital markets to raise capital on favorable terms or to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, general corporate or other expenses, or to refinance existing indebtedness;

•make it more likely that a reduction in our borrowing base following a periodic redetermination could require us to repay a portion of our then-outstanding bank borrowings; and

•make us vulnerable to increases in interest rates as our indebtedness under the Revolving Credit Facility varies with prevailing interest rates.

Our ability to satisfy our obligations depends on our future operating performance and on economic, financial, competitive and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. Our business may not generate sufficient cash flow, and future financings may not be available to provide sufficient net proceeds, to meet these obligations or to successfully execute our business strategy.

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of our indebtedness, and may be forced to take other actions to satisfy the obligations under our indebtedness, which may not be successful.

Our earnings and cash flow could vary significantly from year to year due to the nature of our industry despite our commodity price risk-management activities. As a result, the amount of debt that we can manage in some periods may not be appropriate for us in other periods. Additionally, our future cash flow may be insufficient to meet our debt obligations and other commitments at that time. Any insufficiency could negatively impact our business. A range of economic, competitive, business and industry factors will affect our future financial performance, and, as a result, our ability to generate cash flow from operations and to pay our debt obligations. Many of these factors, such as oil and natural gas prices, economic and financial conditions in our industry and the global economy and initiatives of our competitors, are beyond our control as discussed in this “Risk Factors” section. We may not be able to maintain a level of cash flows from operating activities sufficient to permit us to pay the principal, premium, if any, and interest on our indebtedness.

The lenders under our Revolving Credit Facility could limit our ability to borrow and restrict our use or access to capital.

Our Revolving Credit Facility is an important source of our liquidity. Our ability to borrow under our Revolving Credit Facility is limited by our borrowing base, the size of our lenders’ commitments and our ability to comply with covenants.

The borrowing base under our Revolving Credit Facility is redetermined semi-annually by our lenders who review the value of our reserves and other factors that may be deemed appropriate. Currently, our borrowing base is set at $1.5 billion and the availability under our Revolving Credit Facility is limited to the aggregate elected commitment amount of our lenders, which as of February 1, 2025 is $1.15 billion.

A reduction in our borrowing base below the aggregate commitment amount of our lenders would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and may hinder our ability to execute on our business strategy.

Restrictive covenants in our Revolving Credit Facility and the indentures governing our Senior Notes may limit our financial and operating flexibility.

Both our Revolving Credit Facility and the indentures governing our Senior Notes contain certain restrictions, which may have adverse effects on our business, financial condition or results of operations. These restrictions limit our ability to, among other things, (i) incur additional indebtedness; (ii) pay dividends or repurchase shares; (iii) sell properties; and (iv) make capital investments.

The Revolving Credit Facility also requires us to comply with certain financial maintenance covenants, including a leverage ratio and current ratio.

A breach of any of these restrictive covenants could result in a default under the Revolving Credit Facility and/or the Senior Notes. If a default occurs under the Revolving Credit Facility, the lenders may elect to declare all borrowings thereunder outstanding, together with accrued interest and other fees, to be immediately due and payable. If we are unable to repay our indebtedness when due or declared due, the lenders under the Revolving Credit Facility will also have the right to proceed against the collateral pledged to them to secure the indebtedness. An event of default under the Senior Notes may cause all outstanding Senior Notes to become due and payable immediately or give the trustee and the holders the right to declare all outstanding Senior Notes to become due and payable immediately.

Variable rate indebtedness under our Revolving Credit Facility subjects us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase significantly.

Borrowings under our Revolving Credit Facility are at variable rates of interest and expose us to interest rate risk. As of December 31, 2024, we had no amounts borrowed under our Revolving Credit Facility. If in the future we borrow under the Revolving Credit Facility, then our results of operations would be sensitive to movements in interest rates. There are many economic factors outside our control that have in the past and may, in the future, impact rates of interest including publicly announced indices that underlie the interest obligations related to our Revolving Credit Facility. Factors that impact interest rates include governmental monetary policies, inflation, economic conditions, changes in unemployment rates, international disorder and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even though the amount borrowed remained the same, and our results of operations would be adversely impacted. Such increases in interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations if we borrow under the Revolving Credit Facility in the future.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares of our common stock is subject to certain risks.

We have adopted a cash dividend policy which anticipates a total annual dividend of $1.55 per share, payable to shareholders in quarterly increments of $0.3875 per share of common stock, subject to board authorization and declaration each quarter. Our Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program to acquire up to $1.35 billion of our common stock through December 31, 2025. As of December 31, 2024 we had approximately $557 million of remaining authorized capacity. Any payment of future dividends or repurchasing shares of our common stock will be at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend upon, among other things, our earnings, liquidity, capital requirements, financial condition and other factors deemed relevant. Our Revolving Credit Facility and Senior Notes both limit our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares of our common stock. In addition, cash dividend payments in the future may only be made out of legally available funds and, if we experience substantial losses, such funds may not be available. We can provide no assurances that we will continue to pay dividends at the anticipated rate or repurchase shares of our common stock within the authorized amount or at all.

The trading price of our common stock may decline, and you may not be able to resell shares of our common stock at prices equal to or greater than the price you paid or at all.

The trading price of our common stock may decline for many reasons, some of which are beyond our control. In the event of a drop in the market price of our common stock, you could lose a substantial part or all of your investment in our common stock. Numerous factors, including those referred to in this "Risk Factors" section could affect our stock price. These factors include, among other things, changes in our results of operations and financial condition; changes in commodity prices; changes in the national and global economic outlook; changes in applicable laws and regulations; variations in our capital plan; changes in financial estimates by securities analysts or ratings agencies; changes in market valuations of comparable companies; and additions or departures of key personnel.

Future issuances of our common stock could reduce our stock price, and any additional capital raised by us through the sale of equity or convertible securities may dilute your ownership in us.

As of December 31, 2024, we had 91,100,322 outstanding shares of common stock. We may sell additional shares of common stock in subsequent public or private offerings. We may also issue additional shares of common stock or convertible securities, such as in July 2024 when we issued 21,315,707 shares of common stock in connection with the Aera Merger. We expect to issue additional shares of common stock in connection with post-closing settlements for the Aera Merger. We cannot predict the size of other future issuances of our common stock or securities convertible into common stock or the effect, if any, that such other future issuances and sales of shares of our common stock will have on the market price of our common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock (including shares issued in connection with an acquisition), or the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock.

The ownership position of certain of our stockholders limits other stockholders’ ability to influence corporate matters and could affect the price of our common stock.

As of December 31, 2024, six of our shareholders owned at least 5% each and collectively owned approximately 57% of our common stock. As a result, each of these stockholders, or any entity to which such stockholders sell their stock, may be able to exercise significant control over matters requiring stockholder approval. Further, because of this large ownership position, if these stockholders sell their stock, the sales could depress our share price. Refer to Part II, Item 7 – Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Transactions Related to Our Common Stockfor information on the Registration Rights Agreement related to the Aera Merger.

Sales of shares of our common stock by our executive officers could negatively impact the market price for our common stock.

Sales of our common stock by our executive officers may adversely impact the trading price of our common stock, even when done in compliance with our policies with respect to insider sales. Although we do not expect that the relatively small volume of such sales will itself significantly impact the trading price of our common stock, the market could react negatively to the announcement of such sales, which could in turn affect the trading price of our common stock.